Urgh. As you say. I don't think that tarnishes Christianity in the eyes of anyone with half a brain, because most of us can work out that he probably isn't typical, and we already knew idiots like that existed. But it doesn't help anyone.
Going down the comments a little way, I find someone called "Wayne" and a comment "Christianity cannot co-opt goodness" that provides a little welcome sanity among the hysterics.
There's another comment somewhere that the killer was mentally ill, and anyone who could have given him support and compassion and didn't should now be feeling guilty - that, too, seems to be more along the right lines.
But the rest.... the "argument" that all non-believers must be offended by the Gospels, and if we're not, we can't have read them - huh? I've read them. They're interesting historical documents. Offended? What are these people on?
no subject
Going down the comments a little way, I find someone called "Wayne" and a comment "Christianity cannot co-opt goodness" that provides a little welcome sanity among the hysterics.
There's another comment somewhere that the killer was mentally ill, and anyone who could have given him support and compassion and didn't should now be feeling guilty - that, too, seems to be more along the right lines.
But the rest.... the "argument" that all non-believers must be offended by the Gospels, and if we're not, we can't have read them - huh? I've read them. They're interesting historical documents. Offended? What are these people on?